Text Size

No Holds Barred

No matter where you stand on the candidates...

Need to get something off your chest? Have a topic that doesn't fit one of the other forums? Rant away in here. Mature audiences only, not for the easily offended.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner

No matter where you stand on the candidates...

Unread postby Lokais » Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:23 pm

I am getting sick of all the outright lying, especially from the Clinton campaign. The sad thing is, it works to sway a lot of people. It is a shame that people don't investigate their choices in depth.
Lokais
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:06 pm
Location: New York City

Unread postby ProgRocker » Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:47 pm

Actually, it is happening.

The problem is when it happens, Bill's usually there to pop a gasket (which is better than other things he could pop, I suppose) -- and I think that's starting to really hurt her. He's flat-out out of control, and if some of the SC polls pan out, she's actually in some danger of falling behind Edwards on Saturday.
User avatar
ProgRocker
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby swerb » Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:57 pm

I am no fan of the Clintons, and will not vote for Hillary in November. But their political team is a large, motivated, well organized, cunning, evil machine.

Obama is putty in their hands right now. As we head into FL and Super Tuesday, its clear the strategy the Clintons are employing, and its working. They are going right at Obama, upping the personal attacks, and baiting him into responding.

The Clintons know that the only way Obama can beat them is if he continues to stay completely above all the back and forth sniping and attacks, offering voters a true bastion of change from the current state of American politics. Until recently, he had been that. Until the whole world saw the clips of him going after Hillary in the last debate after an epic bait job.

The Clintons are trying to turn Obama into "just another politician". And its working. Hes as formidable of a foe as the Clintons have faced within their own party, and they are in the process of putting him away. The race will be over after Super Tuesday.

The Clintons political team is ruthless and highly motivated to do two things that have never been done before in American politics. Get a woman elected to the highest office. And have the same family/team in office for 16 years.

If you asked me a year ago, I would have told you I didn't think Hillary had much of a shot of winning a national election. But as we stand here now, I see her chances of winning in Nov as slightly better than 50%, and I really hope I'm wrong.

The tough matchup for the Clintons would be McCain. Hes liked on both sides of the aisle, has worked with Dems and Repubs his entire political career, and is an American war hero who spent a long time in a Viatnamese prison camp. The Clintons brand of sleaze will not play well against McCain, and privately, I think Clinton insiders would tell you that they know they would beat Huckabee handily, would win against Giuliani or Romney, but that McCain scares them.

And thats why I think McCain will emerge from this shaky field of Repub candidates. Electability.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby HoodooMan » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:21 pm

The tough matchup for the Clintons would be McCain. Hes liked on both sides of the aisle, has worked with Dems and Repubs his entire political career, and is an American war hero who spent a long time in a Viatnamese prison camp. The Clintons brand of sleaze will not play well against McCain, and privately, I think Clinton insiders would tell you that they know they would beat Huckabee handily, would win against Giuliani or Romney, but that McCain scares them.

He should.

Unlike Obama, McCain could actually represent a significant change in American politics, because he could be the first president since I've been paying attention to be more than a salesman, pushing whatever cleverly-marketed message he's been fed. Change to me isn't selling something different; it's a principled candidate who believes what he says and maybe has an idea or two of his own that isn't the product of market research.

But then, I'm talking about the McCain I've seen & heard on talk shows in recent years; not necessarily the one who's running today. I heard him on the Diane Rehm show a few months ago and was surprised at how different he sounded already (long, circuitous answers to questions he wasn't asked... interupting... a little disarming ass-kissing to kick off the interview... typical political debate stuff), and it will be interesting to see how much more he'll need to change to get his party's nomination.
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby mrburns » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:31 pm

Many Dems are starting to worry that all this back-and-forth from Hillary and Obama will prevent a Clinton/Obama (in either order) ticket, which would be pretty formidable.

As a Libertarian, I won't vote for Hillary if I can avoid it. I need to learn more from Obama, but out of the three viable Democrats, he's probably my pick right now. I love his ethics, especially compared to Hillary, who is a political whore. Biden was my favorite out of the Democrats, and it's a shame he never had much of a chance but he might be a good vice-presidential candidate (especially for Obama, who is relatively inexperienced when it comes to foreign policy).

Out of the viable Republican candidates, I like Huckabee. I love his ideas with the FairTax, and he seems to be committed to energy independence (my #1 issue). My big problem with him is that having a Baptist minister as the president scares me to no end. We're polar opposites on almost every social issue.
User avatar
mrburns
 
Posts: 915
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Erie, PA
Favorite Player: Rusty Branyan
Least Favorite Player: Rapist QBs

Unread postby HoodooMan » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:55 pm

Biden was my favorite out of the Democrats, and it's a shame he never had much of a chance but he might be a good vice-presidential candidate (especially for Obama, who is relatively inexperienced when it comes to foreign policy).

Biden was my favorite, period.

But he's said that he wouldn't agree to be either Hillary or Obama's Secretary of State (while he was running, but he still said it), so I don't see him as a likely VP match.
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Re: No matter where you stand on the candidates...

Unread postby Dozen » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:56 pm

Lokais wrote:I am getting sick of all the outright lying, especially from the Clinton campaign. The sad thing is, it works to sway a lot of people. It is a shame that people don't investigate their choices in depth.



new to politics? :lol:
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby swerb » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:13 pm

Biden was also my favorite Dem. A little too brutally honest and rough around the edges to ever poll well, but it always surprised me how he could never pull more than 3-4 pts in national polls after what I thought were solid performances in some of the early debates.

Guy is a no nonsense, brutally honest politician that knows as much about foreign policy as anyone in Washington.

As far as Hillary's VP running mate, I don't think it will be Obama. I think Obama's personal ambition coupled with The Clintons unwillingness to share the spotlight added to the fact that the Clintons will already get 95% of the black vote without Obama ... I don't see it happening.

I expect Hillary to pick a Democratic governor, from the south, or from another bellweather state. I wouldn't rule out Strickland, though hes a long shot still.

The south ... that's where Hillary has to win some states. I expect her VP pick will be targeted at winning some key southern states. And clearly, who the Repub opposition is will play a part in that decision for her.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby mrburns » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:33 pm

It's tough not to like Biden; I don't think I've ever seen a politician that I felt was more honest and was never bullshitting me, and that's saying something nowadays. You could argue he performed better than any Democrat in the debates, and he was never more than a blip on the radar screen. I'm registered as a Democrat in PA just so I can vote in the primaries (you can't vote in a primary if you're a registered Independent) and I'm stronlgy considering a write-in for Biden, even though it would be a completely irrelevant vote.

Does the Democratic nominee have to steal a Southern state to win the general election? I'm not so sure. The last few elections have shown us that most states are pretty set one way or the other. There are basically four big swing states that will probably decide the election once again, and they're all northern states; Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida (it's a northern state that's located in the South), and possibly Michigan.
User avatar
mrburns
 
Posts: 915
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Erie, PA
Favorite Player: Rusty Branyan
Least Favorite Player: Rapist QBs

Unread postby swerb » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:43 pm

You look at the '04 map, Kerry lost 278-260 in the electoral collage, and took only one state (not counting Cali), New Mexico, in the entire lower half of the country.

Some people love the electoral college system, others hate it, but regardless of where you stand ... it brings fascinating strategy into the mix. Im just convinced that the Clintons will focus a lot harder on winning some key southern states, especially those with higher women voter turnout %'s.

Especially considering Kerry won Michigan (and PA), and that figures to be a tough win for the Dems this time around, especially if its Romney.

Should be interesting though.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby mrburns » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:33 am

All good points.
User avatar
mrburns
 
Posts: 915
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:55 pm
Location: Erie, PA
Favorite Player: Rusty Branyan
Least Favorite Player: Rapist QBs

Unread postby consigliere » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:36 am

Just out of curiousity, since I am not as deep into politics as most here, is it possible the GOP candidate could take one of the others as a VP running mate? IOW, what if Romney got the nomination. Could he conceivably take McCain as his VP running mate, and would that be a powerful duo? Or, is this not realistic and each of these candidates likely takes someone else?
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby furls » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:14 am

McCain will not be a VP.

Personally, John McCain won my vote the day he stood there in Detroit and said (paraphrased) "Let's be straight, there are some jobs that are not coming back to Detroit."

Michigan, Ohio, and PA are the real keys to winning this election. The only southern state that I could see going Dem (to anyone other than Edwards) is Florida. For McCain to make a statement that honest, true, and risky was gutsy and genuine.

The GOP really doesn't want McCain on the ticket, but I am pretty sure that they realize that none of their other candidates can beat Hillary or Obama.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby FUDU » Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:30 am

Just out of curiousity, since I am not as deep into politics as most here, is it possible the GOP candidate could take one of the others as a VP running mate? IOW, what if Romney got the nomination. Could he conceivably take McCain as his VP running mate, and would that be a powerful duo? Or, is this not realistic and each of these candidates likely takes someone else?


Yes, IMO Thompson would be most of their first choice for a VP.

I think Thompson may have had his sights set on that the whole time?
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby swerb » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:25 am

FUDU wrote:
Just out of curiousity, since I am not as deep into politics as most here, is it possible the GOP candidate could take one of the others as a VP running mate? IOW, what if Romney got the nomination. Could he conceivably take McCain as his VP running mate, and would that be a powerful duo? Or, is this not realistic and each of these candidates likely takes someone else?


Yes, IMO Thompson would be most of their first choice for a VP.

I think Thompson may have had his sights set on that the whole time?

I don't think Thompson would be the selection for McCain. AAMOF, I think McCain may have hinted at his running mate last night .... going out of his way to praise Joe Lieberman, bringing him up out of nowhere. At the least, I think he was floating out there last night (without doing it directly), looking for feelers from the party. The pair led the fight in Congress for the surge in Iraq that is now bearing fruit, and are very close friends who have made a history of putting whats best for America above the wishes of the hard liners of their respective political parties.

McCain has also been linked to the governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty. Minnesota is a key state that Bush lost closely in 2004, and many feel could be a key to a Repub win if they can take it this time.

One last wild card, to combat the womens vote that will go more towards Hillary ... Elizabeth Dole.

Thompson would have been a likely running mate for Giuliani, who's social views drive the hard right nuts. Thompson is strongly conservative, all the way down the line.

Romney, I have no clue who he would pick. You would think that he may go with a Washington veteran whose political views are more in line with the party to counteract the whole Mormon thing. I think he needs that. The religious right is terrified of Romney cause of his religion. Huckabee actually would make sense too, but I get the sense in the debates that they just don't get along well.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby skatingtripods » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:06 pm

My roommate, a masters of applied politics student, is nearly certain that Mike Huckabee is setting himself up to be McCain's VP. Let's think about this from a GOP perspective. First of all, McCain has, generally, done better than Huckabee in the northern states. Huckabee, meanwhile, is a southerner and could really help McCain get in touch with the south. Huckabee rarely, if ever, chastises McCain on stage while he really goes after Romney.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xadOKIuaKLw[/youtube]

That's one of the most genius political ads of recent memory.


Romney's VP, if given the nomination, would have to be a southerner as well. Perhaps Sonny Perdue, governor from Georgia. I could also see McCain with Lindsey Graham, senator from South Carolina.

Anyway, last night we had some friends over and one of them was a Socialist. He told me that he would vote for John McCain over Hillary Clinton. Obviously, with his ideology, that makes no sense. But that just might be a microcosm of how deep the hatred for Hillary goes. A good portion of the country already doesn't like her and McCain is a pretty likeable guy.

Allburn, to your question if a Dem has to steal a southern state, absolutely. Florida. If the Dems can carry Florida, Ohio, and New York, they have a pretty good chance. I don't think Hillary can steal any southern states. Barack probably could, but people are really being turned off to both Democrats with how they've been berating each other lately.

Hillary's running mate? Wow, that's tough. It would have to be a man, obviously, and probably from the south/southwest.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby htown_dawg » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:39 pm

Skating Tripods wrote:Hillary's running mate? Wow, that's tough. It would have to be a man, obviously, and probably from the south/southwest.


Bill Richardson, Governor - NM.
htown_dawg
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 3:54 pm
Location: The Woodlands, TX

Unread postby Apex777 » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:31 pm

Who knows, if Hillary gets the nomination, she may choose dear 'ole Bill as her running mate. . . :roll :roll:
*
*
*
Imagination is more important than knowledge. . .Einstein
User avatar
Apex777
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:12 pm
Location: Northeast OH

Re: No matter where you stand on the candidates...

Unread postby Lokais » Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:17 am

Dozen wrote:
Lokais wrote:I am getting sick of all the outright lying, especially from the Clinton campaign. The sad thing is, it works to sway a lot of people. It is a shame that people don't investigate their choices in depth.



new to politics? :lol:


Not really, but Clinton is doing it so blatently that it makes me ill. I don't want another Republican, but I think I'd vote for McCain over Clinton at this point.

That being said, I love Obama. Can't wait to vote for him on Feb 5th! Great attitude and I think his track record stands up to what he preaches, which is rare in politics.
Lokais
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:06 pm
Location: New York City

Unread postby ProgRocker » Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:53 pm

If tonight's results in SC doesn't chastise the Clintons, nothing will -- and considering Bill tried to equate Obama with Jesse Jackson hours before this absolute ass-whuppin', it may not be.

Here's a prediction: if Hillary loses this nomination, THAT is what will make her divorce Bill.

Added: OMG, Hillary barely gave a sentence to Obama's acceptance speech -- and Obama is gifted, AND he's getting Caroline Kennedy's endorsement tomorrow, in a NEW YORK TIMES op-ed that will compare Obama to JFK by perhaps the only person who can do it sincerely.

Talk about a shift in momentum!
User avatar
ProgRocker
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:02 am

How could anyone vote for Huckabee? He said the Constitution should be changed to be more like the bible. Im glad Goonliani chances are almost dead he is a shitsack that profits of human tragedy. Joe Biden would make an excellent VP.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Unread postby British_Pharaoh » Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:07 am

i stand on their neck
"There is but one thing of real value: to cultivate truth and justice and to live without anger in the midst of lying and unjust men"

-Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
British_Pharaoh
Tony Sipp IS HERE!
 
Posts: 9163
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Pardubice, Czech Republic
Favorite Player: Michael Brantley
Least Favorite Player: Alexei Ramirez

Unread postby consigliere » Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:44 am

ProgRocker wrote:If tonight's results in SC doesn't chastise the Clintons, nothing will -- and considering Bill tried to equate Obama with Jesse Jackson hours before this absolute ass-whuppin', it may not be.

Here's a prediction: if Hillary loses this nomination, THAT is what will make her divorce Bill.

Added: OMG, Hillary barely gave a sentence to Obama's acceptance speech -- and Obama is gifted, AND he's getting Caroline Kennedy's endorsement tomorrow, in a NEW YORK TIMES op-ed that will compare Obama to JFK by perhaps the only person who can do it sincerely.

Talk about a shift in momentum!


Wow, what a night.

I caught Obama's very moving victory speech. That was awesome. I suspect he'll start to gain more momentum and support after that very well done speech.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby skatingtripods » Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:02 pm

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:How could anyone vote for Huckabee? He said the Constitution should be changed to be more like the bible.


I'm pretty sure that he didn't really mean that in a literal sense. That's political suicide. The candidates are all way too savvy to do that.

Sadly, my boy Giuliani is likely done for. He'll stay in through Super Tuesday to see what kind of reaction he gets from the states he actually campaigned in and then bow out. That's just to gauge how he would do in a 2012 bid, especially if McCain gets the Presidency. He'd be 77 at the time his first term would be up.

Obama's a good speaker. I didn't hear the speech, but the way all of his other oratories have gone, unless he was more direct, it probably wasn't a change from the norm. As a very conservative Republican, praying that we don't elect either of the Dem front runners, I really hope we're going up against Hillary and not Barack.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby consigliere » Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:07 pm

Yeah, looking like a two-dog race in both parties. Obama-CLinton, and Romney-McCain.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby ProgRocker » Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:43 pm

Skating Tripods wrote:
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:How could anyone vote for Huckabee? He said the Constitution should be changed to be more like the bible.


I'm pretty sure that he didn't really mean that in a literal sense. That's political suicide. The candidates are all way too savvy to do that.

Sadly, my boy Giuliani is likely done for. He'll stay in through Super Tuesday to see what kind of reaction he gets from the states he actually campaigned in and then bow out. That's just to gauge how he would do in a 2012 bid, especially if McCain gets the Presidency. He'd be 77 at the time his first term would be up.

Obama's a good speaker. I didn't hear the speech, but the way all of his other oratories have gone, unless he was more direct, it probably wasn't a change from the norm. As a very conservative Republican, praying that we don't elect either of the Dem front runners, I really hope we're going up against Hillary and not Barack.


Tripods,

I think Rudy's political career is done. Besides the fact that his closet is so full of skeletons it sounds like Fibber McGee's when he opens it (I'm here all week, tip your waitresses!), the simple fact is that the more people get to know Rudy, the less they like him. That's pretty much the view of most New Yorkers I knew that lived there -- people forget how reviled he was before 9/11. Plus, the guy hammers 9/11 over people's heads for every friggin' tough answer he has to give. He's kind of a creep.

And it's no guarantee that Obama takes yesterday's momentum, but one of the huge problems for Hillary is that SC kind of negated everything she did in NH -- that whole "I found my voice" stuff has been forgotten because Bill is out of control (and apparently doing what he's doing with her blessing - because it is 'two for the price of one').

If Obama comes within 5 points at the end of the day in CA on Super Tuesday, Hillary's toast. That's the state (Hispanic population, establishment in her corner, money) where she's got the most going for her, so that's going to be the Democratic bellweather for that night.

As for the Republicans ... I keep reading McCain and Romney are dead even, and that if McCain loses he'll run out of money. Would that mean you'd coalesce around Mitt, or that you'd try to stretch the campaign out and make the convention brokered?
User avatar
ProgRocker
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby leadpipe » Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:31 pm

ProgRocker wrote:
Skating Tripods wrote:
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:How could anyone vote for Huckabee? He said the Constitution should be changed to be more like the bible.


I'm pretty sure that he didn't really mean that in a literal sense. That's political suicide. The candidates are all way too savvy to do that.

Sadly, my boy Giuliani is likely done for. He'll stay in through Super Tuesday to see what kind of reaction he gets from the states he actually campaigned in and then bow out. That's just to gauge how he would do in a 2012 bid, especially if McCain gets the Presidency. He'd be 77 at the time his first term would be up.

Obama's a good speaker. I didn't hear the speech, but the way all of his other oratories have gone, unless he was more direct, it probably wasn't a change from the norm. As a very conservative Republican, praying that we don't elect either of the Dem front runners, I really hope we're going up against Hillary and not Barack.


Tripods,

I think Rudy's political career is done. Besides the fact that his closet is so full of skeletons it sounds like Fibber McGee's when he opens it (I'm here all week, tip your waitresses!), the simple fact is that the more people get to know Rudy, the less they like him. That's pretty much the view of most New Yorkers I knew that lived there -- people forget how reviled he was before 9/11. Plus, the guy hammers 9/11 over people's heads for every friggin' tough answer he has to give. He's kind of a creep.

And it's no guarantee that Obama takes yesterday's momentum, but one of the huge problems for Hillary is that SC kind of negated everything she did in NH -- that whole "I found my voice" stuff has been forgotten because Bill is out of control (and apparently doing what he's doing with her blessing - because it is 'two for the price of one').

If Obama comes within 5 points at the end of the day in CA on Super Tuesday, Hillary's toast. That's the state (Hispanic population, establishment in her corner, money) where she's got the most going for her, so that's going to be the Democratic bellweather for that night.

As for the Republicans ... I keep reading McCain and Romney are dead even, and that if McCain loses he'll run out of money. Would that mean you'd coalesce around Mitt, or that you'd try to stretch the campaign out and make the convention brokered?


I would agree Rudy is done. I also wholeheartedly agree he has far too many skeletons in this day and age to be able to make it thru the election. I personally wouldn't vote for him.

But I WILL give the guy credit in regards to something you mention Prog, that is, the guy WAS reviled before 911 in New York, but he was reviled by many because he made some tough, unpopular decisions, that were ultimately better for the city.

If tough, unpopular decisions would have been made at the highest level 50 years ago, we wouldn't be trillions in debt, for example.

So, anytime someone shows me they are wiling to at least TRY to help the people instead of simply using the office to get re-elected, I gotta give'm a salute.

Again, I still see no worthy candidate.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6617
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:36 pm

I'm pretty sure that he didn't really mean that in a literal sense. That's political suicide. The candidates are all way too savvy to do that.



I dont want to take the chance. :lol:

It will be really interesting to see how Obama and Clinton do in Florida there are lot of Ex-New Yorkers down there that could sway the vote to Hilliary. Obama crushed her in South Carolina he needed that after getting beat in Nevada and New Hampshire. The Republican cannidates it will come down to Romney/Mccain. Like Joe Scarborough said people have been underestimating Romney his whole political career He was a Mormon Republican who got elected governor of a very Liberal state.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Unread postby skatingtripods » Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:42 pm

ProgRocker wrote:Tripods,

I think Rudy's political career is done. Besides the fact that his closet is so full of skeletons it sounds like Fibber McGee's when he opens it (I'm here all week, tip your waitresses!), the simple fact is that the more people get to know Rudy, the less they like him. That's pretty much the view of most New Yorkers I knew that lived there -- people forget how reviled he was before 9/11. Plus, the guy hammers 9/11 over people's heads for every friggin' tough answer he has to give. He's kind of a creep.


Rudy's political career is far from done. He's going to get a cabinet position if McCain wins. I would expect to see him in a Sec. of State or, the like, role. If General Petraeus isn't moved up to Sec. of Defense, who knows.

He hammers on 9/11 because that's his shining moment. For some reason everybody wants to peg Giuliani as 9/11 being his only notable memory. Once again, he served in Reagan's administration and did a lot of good for the city of New York. Sure 9/11 defines him, but he's a smart man and a good executive leader.

And it's no guarantee that Obama takes yesterday's momentum, but one of the huge problems for Hillary is that SC kind of negated everything she did in NH -- that whole "I found my voice" stuff has been forgotten because Bill is out of control (and apparently doing what he's doing with her blessing - because it is 'two for the price of one').


It's a big win for Barack. Bill did good in the south and if Hillary doesn't, she's pretty much screwed. Obama's going to steamroll on to Super Tuesday with his SC win.

As for the Republicans ... I keep reading McCain and Romney are dead even, and that if McCain loses he'll run out of money. Would that mean you'd coalesce around Mitt, or that you'd try to stretch the campaign out and make the convention brokered?


McCain's going to get some help from the other Republican candidates as they bow out. McCain has a much better chance at winning the popular vote than Romney and the GOP knows that. They may get some help from billionaire Michael Bloomberg for McCain's cause too, with the promise of helping him to some more prominent roles in the future.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby ProgRocker » Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:34 am

To Lead Pipe: talk to the cops and firefighters to see exactly how much Rudy did vs. how much the leadership under Rudy did -- and then start reading about how chiefs and leaders were dumped by Rudy because they didn't bow down deeply enough to Rudy. And nobody's even had to approach Louima (raped with a broomstick while in custody) or Diallo (41 shots while reaching for his wallet) or what he did to clear the homeless off the streets (it involved using the Hudson River as a literal dumping ground). Finally, Rudy's main cleanup was in Times Square, and he essentially let Disney rebuild it -- not a dumb move, but Disney was ready to move on to Broadway, so it wasn't too tough.

To Tripods: I do give Rudy sincere credit for the invention of the "perp walk" and his record as a prosecutor. At one point he would've made a great Attorney General. But not anymore. Not with so many Republicans hating him. And I think Romney would have a better shot on your side than McCain, in part because of age, in part because as greasy as Romney is he plays better on TV, in part because I don't think there are pictures of Romney hugging Bush while bowing his head down like there are of McCain, which I guarantee you will be flying around the Internet like the latest Britney-without-panties beaver shot.

The clincher for me about McCain is how he sucked up to Bush after what Bush and Rove did to his family to win SC in 2000. Any self-respecting man would've just kicked those two bastards in the crotch until they were Ken dolls for that crap -- and yet, McCain wants to be President so badly he sucks in all that bile to get into the good graces of those two. It's one of the most disrespectful, self-loathing and gutless things I've ever seen a politician do, which says a lot.
User avatar
ProgRocker
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:55 am

When did this country's political theater become a circus freakshow? I blame Andrew Jackson. Rudi Goonliani was such a thinking mayor he put the city's Emergency Response Center in the WTC the one place terrorist already attacked. If thats not genius foresight I dont know what is. Goonliani would make a fine boat anchor. The state of this country is why Thomas Jefferson suggested an armed revolution every 20 years to "preserve democracy".
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Unread postby furls » Mon Jan 28, 2008 3:00 am

Every election year I am reminded of this quote attributed to Alexander Tyler c. 1787, although the true origins are not actually verified:

About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in
1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some
2000 years prior:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
>
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "

Now every time I hear a candidate speak, I always ask myself who are they promising money too. If you listen closely, you can usually tell. Running for president requires a lot of capital, not just in advertising for the election itself, but also for the votes it takes to win. Ultimately all the money ends up coming from the treasury in the form of kickbacks to those that funded the election or to the voters who voted the candidates into office.

President's don't cut programs anymore, that pisses off voters, they just promise new one's and tax cuts. Hence spiralling deficits, increasing gov't spending, and a weakened US dollar.

In case you cannot tell, I am a fiscal conservative, skeptic, and libertarian.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Unread postby skatingtripods » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:44 am

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:When did this country's political theater become a circus freakshow? I blame Andrew Jackson. Rudi Goonliani was such a thinking mayor he put the city's Emergency Response Center in the WTC the one place terrorist already attacked. If thats not genius foresight I dont know what is. Goonliani would make a fine boat anchor. The state of this country is why Thomas Jefferson suggested an armed revolution every 20 years to "preserve democracy".


You're going to blame today's political landscape on a President from the 1840s? As a mass media major, I'm going to blame it on my own field. Media attention and their ability to dig up every possible kind of dirt on a candidate is what has turned many campaigns into nothing but mudslinging.

As for Giuliani, he never did what you say. I'm reading Leadership right now. The biggest quandary for him was that their supplies (water tanks, non-perishable food items, gas masks, etc.), in the event of an emergency, were in WTC 7. He immediately moved the command post to an adjacent building on Barclay, northeast of the WTC complex. Further, after the collapse of the first tower, they moved their command to an fire house out of harm's distance from ground zero. Giuliani and his aides went back to the site many times that day.

Anyway, Furls, I really enjoyed your post. I agree with your assessment that the problem is offering tax cuts, but then starting new programs. Excessive spending through new programs is really killing this country's economy. Re-organization and increasing consumerism is the way to go.

ProgRocker wrote:To Tripods: I do give Rudy sincere credit for the invention of the "perp walk" and his record as a prosecutor. At one point he would've made a great Attorney General. But not anymore. Not with so many Republicans hating him. And I think Romney would have a better shot on your side than McCain, in part because of age, in part because as greasy as Romney is he plays better on TV, in part because I don't think there are pictures of Romney hugging Bush while bowing his head down like there are of McCain, which I guarantee you will be flying around the Internet like the latest Britney-without-panties beaver shot.


The only Republicans that really hate Giuliani are the religious right. That's really a small group of Repubs in the whole scheme of things. The NRA and gun-happy conservatives aren't fond of him, but they'd never vote Dem anyway.

McCain has a far better shot. He can win independent voters. Romney can't. Romney looks too manufactured and to independents would look like the rich, white, typical Republican. McCain has a fantastic record of experience, which I think is now becoming huge. Neither Barack, nor Hillary, nor even Romney have McCain's years in Washington.

How the hell do you know so much about Giuliani? Have you read Leadership? What about The Prince of the City by Fred Siegel that talks about what Giuliani did for the city before and after 9/11? Or do you only read the 9/11 conspiracies? I find it pretty hard to believe that Barack Obama has such a sterling reputation and Giuliani is such a scumbag. Why can Barack do no wrong? You totally shrugged off the Investor's Daily article I posted in another thread. Why is that?

All Rudy did was clean up Times Square? Give me a break. He got rid of the violent homeless men who would wash windshields with the hope of money. Those individuals would kick car doors and break windows if they didn't get any money. And they were notoriously spotted on the outskirts of the city near the tunnels and bridges. Bad for tourism and safety, Rudy and his staff cleaned that up. What about the huge decrease in the number of homicides? The year before he took office, 2400 homicides. That number steadily declined every year.


The clincher for me about McCain is how he sucked up to Bush after what Bush and Rove did to his family to win SC in 2000. Any self-respecting man would've just kicked those two bastards in the crotch until they were Ken dolls for that crap -- and yet, McCain wants to be President so badly he sucks in all that bile to get into the good graces of those two. It's one of the most disrespectful, self-loathing and gutless things I've ever seen a politician do, which says a lot


So you hate McCain because he's been a supporter of our President. If you've watched a Republican debate, and judging by your comments in every post, you haven't, he's distanced himself from President Bush. Sure, he applauds his foreign policy to an extent, as do many Republicans. His mismanagement of the war has been a misstep, but it really has not been catastrophic. The Democrats that keep blocking the necessary funding are fucking our troops over royally. All because they want to abandon Iraq and leave it in the hands of instability. Have they not learned from history? Germany, Afghanistan, Korea, Kosovo. We left all of these areas too early and the consequences were pretty evident.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby ProgRocker » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:11 pm

On Rudy: I generally try not to read haigographies, because that's what they are: puffery by the guy/gal writing it. I know about him because of at least half a dozen friends (including an ex that I'm still close to) that lived there. They can tell you that he "cleaned up the homeless problem" by herding them and just moving them out of Manhattan. That's not cleaning up the problem, that's relocating it -- and I'm not saying other cities didn't do that. What I am saying is that Rudy did it and then tried to create this myth about himself because of it.

Because that's what the cops and the firefighters have said and are saying -- Rudy is an egomaniac who cannot stand anyone getting credit for anything but himself, yet at the same time not willing to take any blame when something he does turns out to be horrifically wrong (such as his decision to put the terrorist command post in WTC, despite of every single official telling him that it was a stupid thing to do). There's a reason the rank-and-file police and firefighters in NYC have been doing everything they can to kill Rudy's candidacy. I have no doubt that's where the stories about them being dog walkers for his then-mistress came from. Go to their web sites. They're not hard to find.

Regarding Times Square: it's kind of like Clinton getting too much credit for the economy when, thanks to the dot-com boom and the explosion of the Internet, he simply was the right place in the right time and got the lion's share of credit for it. The 1990s was the time a lot of conglomerates started investing in Broadway, and Times Square as the epicenter was the place where a lot of them started investing - none more important than Disney. Does Rudy get credit for it? Sure. Should he get all the credit for it? Not really - right place, right time.

To clarify my feelings about McCain: it's not that he's a Bush supporter (but that doesn't help), it's that to me he has no self-respect and will sell out whatever he needs -- even the reputation of his family -- to win the Presidency. I suppose everyone does that, but McCain really, REALLY ate a lot of shite in order to get the approval of the Republican braintrust as represented by Bush. There really should be a point after which you say "It's just politics" isn't enough to make up for what you did to win. (Ironically, I think that's part of what happened in SC with Obama and Hillary this past weekend.)

Finally, to say this military hasn't gotten the money they desired is one I don't buy for two reasons: (1) the Republicans held Congress until last January and gave Bush pretty much everything he wanted whenever he wanted it, which includes funding the military (ESPECIALLY after 9/11); and (2) if you're saying these wars are not going well, I would counter and say they didn't all start going badly this past year and to try to pawn those failures off as a lack of Democratic funding this year is at best disingenuous and at worst scapegoating.
User avatar
ProgRocker
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:18 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby VultureHxC » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:37 pm

i don't know too much about the GOP candidates, mainly just the negatives about them and all the democrats seem to have some kind of glaring weakness or character trait that i can't stand. to me, clinton's positions seem to be answers that will satisfy both parties and moderates and not positions she seems to actually believe. she seems almost like someone in a debate class that has to take a position they don't want but put in the work and due diligence to have a good, solid agruement because it will get them a good grade. obama is a good speaker but i haven't heard much of anything he's help do in congress. is there any bills he's written up BEFORE he began running for president? (this isn't meant to be an insult but if he has can someone let me know as i just haven't heard anything about it) edwards seems to be attacking clinton so much that his positions seem to get lost in his mudslinging. i'm with a lot of people in that biden is also my favorite candidate. he has foreign policy experience, seems to have a firm grasp on his positions and at least a general outline of plans. he doesn't attack other candidates and seems to be the antithesis of the politician stereotype. he said something at one of the debates to the effect of it didn't matter what a candidates plans are but if the plans are what is right for the american people is the thing that matters. i think he would be a great running mate for a candidate. if i had my choice of democrats, it would be biden, edwards, obama, then clinton. i only put edwards ahead of obama because i felt early on edwards was actually saying more than obama early on as i felt obama was kind of just going through the motions and feeling out the campaign process but obama has really closed the gap and almost passed edwards in my book.

note: being at school and working i don't get to keep up too much with all the politics and goings on of the campaigns and my main source of information is the debates and countdown with keith olbermann, which may explain why i only hear negative things about the GOP candidates
VultureHxC
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: Medina, OH

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:16 am

You're going to blame today's political landscape on a President from the 1840s? As a mass media major, I'm going to blame it on my own field. Media attention and their ability to dig up every possible kind of dirt on a candidate is what has turned many campaigns into nothing but mudslinging.



Dude, Tripods thats was a joke man I dont really blame Andrew Jackson. The media is shit but as a nation we eat it up like Mcdonalds. There has always been mudslinging by politicians my god Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton.


As for Giuliani, he never did what you say. I'm reading Leadership right now. The biggest quandary for him was that their supplies (water tanks, non-perishable food items, gas masks, etc.), in the event of an emergency, were in WTC 7. He immediately moved the command post to an adjacent building on Barclay, northeast of the WTC complex. Further, after the collapse of the first tower, they moved their command to an fire house out of harm's distance from ground zero. Giuliani and his aides went back to the site many times that day.


I stand by what I said about the NYC Emergency Response Center.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Unread postby Lokais » Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:10 pm

The longer the primaries go on, the more it benefits Obama, I think. Hillary started out as the much more well-known candidate. During this amount of time, Obama has gotten the chance to really get his message out there. I see them splitting Super Tuesday and Obama pulling ahead in the late(normally meaningless, but not this year) primaries.

I'll be voting for Obama on Tuesday!
Lokais
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:06 pm
Location: New York City


Return to No Holds Barred

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests